Here's a curious story, not so much for what it says, but for the framing. Here's the basics. Lawyer is representing a woman who strips for a living. He reduces her legal fees in return for her performing for him. She claims inappropriate touching, though no criminal charges were ever filed. He has his license suspended for 15 months. Now, here's part of the article, with what I found curious highlighted.

CHICAGO - An attorney has been suspended for more than a year for accepting nude dances from a stripper as partial payment for the legal fees she owed him.

The Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission on Thursday said Scott Robert Erwin will begin serving a 15-month suspension for misconduct next month.

Erwin, who practices in the northern Illinois city of DeKalb, and his client mutually agreed that she'd perform nude dances for him in his office as a way to reduce her legal fees, the commission's report said. He credited her for $534 toward his bill for services of various legal matters, the report said.

Notice something there? The only time that the lawyer is mentioned as an initiator is when he credits the dancer for services. But it's not that alone. Notice the way the language creeps--first, the attorney accepts the dances, then the two mutually agreed to the dances, and finally he credits her.

So what's missing? Any real description of how these two came up with this arrangement. Did the dancer make the suggestion or did the lawyer or did they hint around at it like in a scene out of a porn movie?